[Vote] (6-67) Siam Rework

[pineappledan]

Current situation:
Current UA:
Influence with City-States starts at 40.
Yields from Friendly and Allied City-States increased by 100%.
+25% to Combat Strength of Allied City-State Capitals.
+10 Experience to Units gifted by City-States.

Current Wat UB
Constabulary replacement
Unlocks at theology (2 techs earlier)
+1 to forests and jungles
+2 to shrine and temple in the same city

Proposal
Proposed UA:
Yields, Resources, Happiness, and Unit Gift frequency from Friendly and Allied City-States increased by 100%.

Proposed UB change:
Remove +1 to forests and jungles
Increase the bonus to shrines and temples to +3
Add +10 Influence from Diplomatic Missions.

Civilization change:
Remove jungle start bias

Rationale:
UA change

• The current UA has 3 weird, ancillary bonuses. None of them affect how you play with Siam, they’re all just narrow steroids:
  • +25% to Combat Strength of Allied City-State Capitals is basically useless. It doesn't affect you. It only manages to make tributing your allies a little harder for enemy civs. Otherwise it's a non-factor
  • 40 starting Influence is a 1-off bonus that translates to some free early yields, and then doesn't do anything ever again. A bonus that affects your decisions and has impact for the whole game would be much better.
  • the unit gift XP boosts militaristic civs a bit, which is nice, but it's not very useful
• Proposal is to expand the 1 relevant UA bonus so it doubles ALL bonuses from city-states. Currently the yield bonus doubles everything from cultural, maritime, and religious city-states, but mercantile and militaristic city states give things that aren't doubled.
• This makes Siam's treatment of all city-state ally types more consistent and makes the doubling bonus more holistic.
• The resource quantity doubling would affect the unique luxuries from mercantile CS, as well as the luxuries and strategic resources provided by all CS allies. The luxury quantity is only relevant if you have adopted statecraft, allowing CS-imported luxuries to contribute to monopolies, but the strategic resource quantity is always useful.
• The resource quantity doubling would not interact with the Statecraft bonus that gives +1 strategic resource copy per CS ally, because those resources are given by the policy, and not the CS directly. The SR quantity bonus only augments resources given by CS from their own tiles or from their unique luxury resource, in the case of Mercantile CS.

UB and start bias change

• The Iroquois also give +1 yield to all forest/jungle. The bonus there is much earlier, feeds into the rest of the civ’s kit better, and justifies the starting bias better.
• Siam’s UB bonus to forest/jungle has no thematic link to wats, and is very late to be dictating a start bias. If it wasn’t for this bonus, Siam wouldn’t have to be in jungles at all, and as it stands has >2 eras with no interactions with jungle.
• If Siam didn’t have a start priority, and had no bias, that would make it easier to place other civs on the map and improve map placements for other civs that rely on the map biases more.
• The diplomatic bonus is a conventional, safe bonus for the most pure diplomatic civ in the game. relevant, straightforward, and easy to use.
• It's unique. We don't have a civ that boosts diplomatic missions
• Increase the to double-down a bit more on that science secondary focus, which is a rarer yield type than for uniques. Compensates for the loss of the raw yields a bit.

Complex Proposal: DLL + UI + Database Changes

 

[Little Billy]

Proposed UB change:
Remove +1 to forests and jungles
Add +10 Influence from Diplomatic Missions.

Does the extra influence only apply to diplo units built in that city or do you only need one building to get the effect?

I would also consider this a pretty big unwarranted nerf, although that may be just my playstyle. Culture is much more useful than more effective diplo units imo

 

[pineappledan]

Does the extra influence only apply to diplo units built in that city or do you only need one building to get the effect?

Just in that city. This is consistent with how Chancery works, but that building only gives +5

 

[ma_kuh]

I think the diplo bonus is fine. If Siam is suddenly culture starved I would prefer giving it back to them through some diplo-related trigger anyway, like scaling from Diplomatic Missions or something. More unique than jungle => culture.

 

[pineappledan]

Could also just add more base yields to the Wat, or increase the To shrine/temple to +3 if people think the Wat is lacking in raw yields

 

[Revolutionist_8]

Could also just add more base yields to the Wat, or increase the To shrine/temple to +3 if people think the Wat is lacking in raw yields

Yes, that'd be a good idea I think. Otherwise, the proposal makes a lot of sense.

 

[adan_eslavo]

It looks really one-dimensional. Just make Friend or Ally and count your profits.
I prefer to have a variety of choices instead of same plot every game. Current UA focuses on CSs in really huge way, but your suggestions cuts it drastically.

 

[azum4roll]

I still prefer making Siam the pledge civ. If my pledge proposal passes so it's no longer binary we can consider that?

+10 Influence from Diplomatic Missions isn't very strong. Emissaries at the time are very expensive, and you usually start using Diplomatic Units in Renaissance only. Envoys give +70 Influence with Chancery + Printing Press, so +10 is only a +14.2% increase.

Chancery gives +10 btw.

 

[Legen]

The current UA has 3 weird, ancillary bonuses. None of them affect how you play with Siam, they’re all just narrow steroids:

• +25% to Combat Strength of Allied City-State Capitals is basically useless. It doesn't affect you. It only manages to make tributing your allies a little harder for enemy civs. Otherwise it's a non-factor
• 40 starting Influence is a 1-off bonus that translates to some free early yields, and then doesn't do anything ever again. A bonus that affects your decisions and has impact for the whole game would be much better.
• the unit gift XP boosts militaristic civs a bit, which is nice, but it's not very useful

I see those three bonuses as sharing a thematic link with the "Father governs Children" UA. I don't think that removing two of them is a good approach; rather, if they are not affecting Siam's playstyle, you just try to buff them in a way that they get to affect it.

 

[Rekk]

More combat bonuses!
Gain +25% Combat Strength when fighting in Friendly/Allied territory.

 

[rkkn]

how about have the UB give diplo units produced in that city +move (and +embarked move)
so that you can more easily influence more distant city states

 

[pineappledan]

Would be cool if they could get a scaling % bonus to their diplomatic action based on how far they are from your capital. Very Kosa Pan.

That would be new code though.

 

[pineappledan]

It looks really one-dimensional. Just make Friend or Ally and count your profits

Siam is the most focused pure diplo civ. I think it is good the game has a civ that is focused and straightforward.

I disagree with your statement that this makes Siam less flexible. This makes Siam More flexible. Their current bonus to forest/jungle on the Wat limits their viable settling locations and makes them map dependent. That is the opposite of flexible.

I see those three bonuses as sharing a thematic link with the "Father governs Children" UA. I don't think that removing two of them is a good approach; rather, if they are not affecting Siam's playstyle, you just try to buff them in a way that they get to affect it.

The father governs children UA has no thematic link to instant influence on meeting or higher city defenses whatsoever. It is a reference to the Mandala imperial system, which describes how the imperial core could dictate decisions and orders towards the periphery. It did not make Siam preternatural good at meeting people, or investing in their defense.

 

[Recursive]

Sponsored.

 

[Diomedes_]

Does this new UA affect the Statecraft policy giving you 25% of allied CS science?

 

[pineappledan]

Does this new UA affect the Statecraft policy giving you 25% of allied CS science?

No

 

[dostillevi]

Only concern is removing the jungle start bias. Whether or not Siam benefits from being in jungle, it's still thematic. Without it.. desert Siam? ugh. A problem for next congress.

 

[Rekk]

Only concern is removing the jungle start bias. Whether or not Siam benefits from being in jungle, it's still thematic. Without it.. desert Siam? ugh. A problem for next congress.

Desert Russia?
Tundra Egypt?
Coastal Mongolia?

Civilizations only receive biases if their kit needs it. The only piece of Siamese kit that wants forest/jungle is the Wat. Remove that bonus and it loses its forest/jungle bias. It would happen even if it wasn't explicitly proposed.

 

[dostillevi]

Desert Russia?
Tundra Egypt?
Coastal Mongolia?

Civilizations only receive biases if their kit needs it. The only piece of Siamese kit that wants forest/jungle is the Wat. Remove that bonus and it loses its forest/jungle bias. It would happen even if it wasn't explicitly proposed.

All three of those have starting biases that make those options unlikely, and probable only if the preferred terrain is unavailable.

 

[rkkn]

All three of those have starting biases that make those options unlikely, and probable only if the preferred terrain is unavailable.

russia has no start bias

the others do tho, so idk why they were used as examples